lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 2 May 2019 16:13:46 +0200 From: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com> To: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Mathieu Malaterre <malat@...ian.org>, x86@...nel.org, Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 05/11] mtd: rawnand: vf610_nfc: add initializer to avoid -Wmaybe-uninitialized Hi Masahiro, Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> wrote on Tue, 23 Apr 2019 12:49:53 +0900: > This prepares to move CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING from x86 to a common > place. We need to eliminate potential issues beforehand. > > Kbuild test robot has never reported -Wmaybe-uninitialized warning > for this probably because vf610_nfc_run() is inlined by the x86 > compiler's inlining heuristic. > > If CONFIG_OPTIMIZE_INLINING is enabled for a different architecture > and vf610_nfc_run() is not inlined, the following warning is reported: > > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/vf610_nfc.c: In function ‘vf610_nfc_cmd’: > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/vf610_nfc.c:455:3: warning: ‘offset’ may be used uninitialized in this function [-Wmaybe-uninitialized] > vf610_nfc_rd_from_sram(instr->ctx.data.buf.in + offset, > ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > nfc->regs + NFC_MAIN_AREA(0) + offset, > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > trfr_sz, !nfc->data_access); > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ IMHO this patch has no dependencies with this series. Would you mind sending it alone with the proper Fixes tag? > > Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com> > --- > > Changes in v3: None > Changes in v2: > - split into a separate patch > > drivers/mtd/nand/raw/vf610_nfc.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/vf610_nfc.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/vf610_nfc.c > index a662ca1970e5..19792d725ec2 100644 > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/vf610_nfc.c > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/raw/vf610_nfc.c > @@ -364,7 +364,7 @@ static int vf610_nfc_cmd(struct nand_chip *chip, > { > const struct nand_op_instr *instr; > struct vf610_nfc *nfc = chip_to_nfc(chip); > - int op_id = -1, trfr_sz = 0, offset; > + int op_id = -1, trfr_sz = 0, offset = 0; > u32 col = 0, row = 0, cmd1 = 0, cmd2 = 0, code = 0; > bool force8bit = false; > Thanks, Miquèl
Powered by blists - more mailing lists